Home>Articles>Is the California Commission on the Status of Women and Girls Identifying as Trans?

California Commission on the Status of Women and Girls. (Photo: women.ca.gov)

Is the California Commission on the Status of Women and Girls Identifying as Trans?

Gov. Ronald Reagan made the Commission on the Status of Women a permanent, independent agency

By Katy Grimes, June 19, 2023 4:04 pm

“California Women Lead, in partnership with the California Commission on the Status of Women and Girls, will announce the 40 members of the 2023 class of recipients of the California Women Lead Scholarship Program for women and gender expansive Fellows in the Sacramento Capitol community,” a press release sent Monday says.

I’m confused. In recent months, we’ve been force fed stories of transgender acceptance, transgender “affirming care,” how trans athletes must be allowed to participate as their chosen gender, Target’s “tuck-friendly” bathing suits for infants and toddlers, and Dylan Mulvaney as the sports bra model for Nike.

What stance will the California Commission on the Status of Women and Girls take? Will trans-girls and trans-women be considered for the California Women Lead Scholarship Program? Is that what “and gender expansive Fellows” means?

Apparently, “Gender-expansive” can describe someone with a more flexible gender identity than might be associated with a typical binary. LGBTQ Nation says “The ‘gender expansive’ definition as per the Diversity Style Guide – a resource created for journalists and media professionals reporting on issues affecting the LGBTQ community, – is ‘people who challenge cultural expectations regarding gender roles, identities, expressions or norms.’”


A quick look at the California Commission on the Status of Women and Girls website betrays a great deal:

“The California Commission on the Status of Women and Girls is celebrating Pride Month, with the first panel of our ongoing CCSWG Speaker Series focused on Supporting the Health, Safety, and Wellness of LGBTQIA+ Youth & Our Roles as Advocates, Allies, and Policy Makers.”

The Speakers are:

Senator Caroline Menjivar (D-Burbank), a CCSWG Commissioner whose pronouns are “she/her/Ella,” elected in November 2022, “has volunteered on the Board of Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), Los Angeles Chapter, the Advisory Board of Help Group’s Kaleidoscope, and as the Diversity, Equity & Inclusion Officer for San Fernando Valley Young Dems Club.”

Alexis Sanchez, Director of Advocacy and Training, Sacramento LGBTQ Community Center, whose background is in public health policy with a specialization in substance use disorders in the LGBTQIA+ community. She served on the City of West Hollywood’s Transgender Advisory Board for 4 years and in this role worked to create numerous policy changes and campaigns to create a safer city for transgender people.

Dana TherActivist Johnson, MSW, Director of Youth Housing & Trainer, Rainbow Community Center, Contra Costa County, whose pronouns are “They/Them/Theirs,” is a gender non-binary masculine of centered community activist that brings experience as an Author, documentary filmmaker, DEI&B practitioner, and Professional Development trainer. Dana also has 18 years’ experience counseling and servicing justice involved youth. Dana serves as a LGBTQ+ Commissioner and PRIDE Initiative co-chair for the County of San Mateo; and a board member of CoastPride Center.

So what the California Commission on the Status of Women and Girls is really communicating is that this commission, once dedicated to “the Status of Women and Girls,” has now sacrificed women and girls at the alter of the very minority trans community.

Good luck with that, girls.

The California Advisory Commission on the Status of Women was established in 1965 “for the purpose of developing recommendations ‘which will enable women to make the maximum contribution to society.’”

In 1971, “The Governor made the Commission on the Status of Women a permanent, independent agency.”

What governor?

According to the “Report of the Advisory Commission on the Status of Women: California women Ronald Reagan, Governor, 1971,” it was California Governor Ronald Reagan – which the California Commission on the Status of Women and Girls omits on its website. Ronald Reagan was California Governor January 2, 1967 – January 6, 1975.

Such fools.

Women’s organizations and women’s sports are being taken over by the most radical leftists. Why? Because women were already liberated, already broke the glass ceiling, and do in fact, receive equal pay for equal jobs when our time off is taken into consideration in pay calculation. What was left to fight for and about other than partisan politics?

Notably, most American adults – nearly 70% – oppose including trans athletes in sports, and say transgender athletes should only compete only on sports teams that correspond with their biological sex, according to a June report from Gallup.

In 2012, the Commission was briefly de-funded because of budget cuts during the recession. The Legislature may want to consider this again – they are otherwise largely useless as their website notes:

“*All references to ‘women and girls’ include gender-expansive individuals (cis women and girls, trans women and girls, nonbinary individuals, gender-nonconforming individuals, genderqueer individuals, and any women or girl identified individuals).”

Report of the Advisory Commission on the Status of Women: California women Ronald Reagan, Governor, 1971 [cover states: California Women
Advisory Commission on the Status of Women. (Photo: abaa.org)
Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Spread the news:


10 thoughts on “Is the California Commission on the Status of Women and Girls Identifying as Trans?

  1. Wow, lest anyone has somehow managed to remain skeptical, these bureaucratic radical-activist-trans-alphabet people really ARE on the march to erase women, as so many wise observers have noted. What an achievement it would be if they can manage to pull THAT off! (*eyeroll*)

    Meanwhile, these people’s utterances have gone from “word salads” to “that’s not even a word.” Wouldn’t it be great for them if they could all be transported to a tiny island, far, far away, in the South Seas somewhere, where they could live off the land, make cross-sex bamboo clothing for each other, concoct cross-sex hormones from the lush flora and fauna, perform mutilating surgeries on each other, make blue hair dye from the ink of octopus, and speak their strange and wonderful language amongst themselves?
    Think anyone would miss them?

    By the way, I recognize the artist in the graphic above. It’s the same one who did all the CA government Covid illustrations, like the one depicting the young man in the Covid mask who kindly delivered a stack of Tupperwared Thanksgiving dishes to the porch of a quarantined old lady’s cottage as she waved gratefully to him from the window. Because, you know, it was dangerous to go out, right? Or be with our families, remember? How much do you suppose THEY get paid for churning out those colorful government pictograms? They’re probably set for life. Sigh.

  2. Good eye, Show.
    I have been thinking about how we barely have had time to resume our lives coming out of the ‘pandemic’ lockdowns and….BAM…..we are suddenly hit with
    -a large ‘majority’ of so called trans kids
    -daily legislation that chips away at PARENTS rights and their legal responsibility for their minor children
    -the ECHO of the main stream media going radio silent on these issues
    There must be trans people with children who are against CA AB 957 ?
    There must be gay people who feel that they are being ‘upstaged’ by the need to change a persons gender to be popular?
    Re: strip shows in libraries and surgery for minors-
    Would it be celebrated if straight women were performing in those same outfits at the library or
    would there be outrage?
    If a minor wants a breast enlargement, would the state pay for that ?
    Would they do it without notifying the parents?
    Or would there be outrage ?

    1. SUCH good questions, Mary. They are the ones that let us know that the bombardment you refer to is contrived. It is, at best, an engineered distraction by the political opposition or, at worst, a diabolical attempt to undermine the remaining foundations of our country and to replace a functioning society with chaos. This attack, if it continues, will destroy our ability and desire to form families, it will finish off the churches, and prevent human beings from flourishing. I mean, what could be more basic to humans than whether or not they are male and female, a man or a woman, and all that grows and blooms and prospers from that? Stir that up, mock it and confuse it and there’s going to be trouble. As we’re seeing!
      The Devil may be powerless (in the end) but he’s not stupid.

      1. Yes Showandtell, the objective is absolutely the breakdown of the fabric of society and the destruction of the nuclear family (as we know it.) Drag Queen Story Hour for 3rd graders? These mentally disturbed perverts would be jailed or executed in Singapore. We certainly can’t do that, but as a society we have to figure a rational way to put an end to this bullshit.

        1. Remove Scott From Power !
          A good first step.
          Most of the worst bills can be linked to him, I would bet.
          But, the thing that pisses me off is all the yes men ( and women, etc) that just vote this destruction of society into law because they either
          1. Feel that it won’t affect them
          2. Are so afraid of getting cancelled that they vote yes.
          Of course, they may just be following their Masters Voice.
          WEF ,Soros,Santa,etc.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *